On 2/14/13 1:43 AM, "Prasanna Santhanam" <t...@apache.org> wrote:
> >Personally I'm okay with either tool. IMO the real issue is in people >reviewing a patch within time for a release. On the review I've cited >we've got a lot of things to learn from - > >a) timely response from blueprint (FS) owners and/or asking for time >for a thorough review >b) sign-off from multiple committers >c) incremental patch sets > I do feel that 'enough' committers problem highlighted by Pranav is a real problem with the Gerrit workflow. But if the contributor asks for multiple reviews then Gerrit is better than RB. In RB it is not clear when the patch is ready for commit since it is not clear which of the previous comments have been addressed. So, some tool is better than none Gerrit > RB, provided it is not mandatory for 2 reviews.
